Jump to content

Shinma

9/20/15. Lions at Vikings. Week 2.

Recommended Posts

View image: staff

That is what I based all of those numbers on. And I'm not sure how those wouldn't jive. I posted 73.2% accuracy with 95.9 QBR when he threw the ball in under 2.5 seconds (which is assumed to be not under duress). Look to be very close to 78% and a 7.5 yard average. The second numbers indicate when Stafford throws the ball after 2.5 seconds, it was my assumption (and I have admitted it is only an assumption) that after 2.5 seconds he is more than likely under-duress or having to target a secondary or tertiary receiving option which, IMO, isn't Stafford's strong suit.

That makes sense from your explanation then. I assumed the 2.5 was under duress, and greater than 2.5 would naturally be when the line holds, since the average time it takes a QB has to throw the ball is greater than 2.5 seconds. (https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/07/signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/ from 2012, but probably pretty close)

I'm curious why they chose 2.5 seconds as the divider, as well as how the numbers change at 3 seconds, or 2.7 seconds, or 2.2 seconds. Especially since the average NFL sack takes 3 seconds. Doesn't seem like a great line in the sand time for determining duress.

Edit: I guess what I'm driving at, is counter intuitively to what I think we both believe, it seems like if Stafford has great numbers before 2.5s, it would indicate he is actually extremely good in blitzing situations (duress) when he throws the ball. But the data gets messy when you start looking at scrambling. Id rather see the data aggregated a different way, or with more time chunks, as 2.5s+ is going to include a ton of situations that just add noise.

Edited by hardyaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

Now, to your last point; at what point do we get to the point where Stafford simply requires too many people around him to succeed? If your assumption is correct and we need 5 solid hogs in front of him for him to succeed (in addition to an all-pro #1 WR, AND a running game, AND a solid #2 like Tate, AND one or even two pass-first TE, AND another third WR option) doesn't that seem a little excessive? That is a lot of resources required to get production out of an offense...

How to build a team is always the question. In the past I think it was a safer bet to try and build a team with solid line play than hope you could land an special talent at QB. Could be today's game has become so QB focused that that is no longer the case.

I was hoping to see where P. Manning was on those lists because I always had the impression watching him that Manning was a guy that didn't handle pressure particularly well.

TBH, I've never been huge fan of Stafford. I thought when he came on the scene that his one plus tool was a really quick release. I thought that gave him a chance to be a top tier guy, but the Lions are such a continual slow motion train wreck in so many areas that to this day I really don't have a strong sense of whether he is good enough to win with or not. But these are interesting breakdowns.

Edited by Gehringer_2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fwiw, I expect a tier 2 QB to win, but he needs a lot closer to ideal circumstances. Offensively, I think in terms of OL,WRs and run game, in order to really be competitive for a SB with a tier 2 QB you need all 3 to be at least average with at least one being elite, and ideally another being above average. The D needs to be at least above average as well. That's the reality of the NFL. You likely need either an elite QB or to be really strong in just about every other facet of the game. A truly elite defense gives you some wiggle room with the rest of the roster as well IMO.

I can get down with all of this, this all sounds about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View image: staff

That is what I based all of those numbers on. And I'm not sure how those wouldn't jive. I posted 73.2% accuracy with 95.9 QBR when he threw the ball in under 2.5 seconds (which is assumed to be not under duress). Look to be very close to 78% and a 7.5 yard average. The second numbers indicate when Stafford throws the ball after 2.5 seconds, it was my assumption (and I have admitted it is only an assumption) that after 2.5 seconds he is more than likely under-duress or having to target a secondary or tertiary receiving option which, IMO, isn't Stafford's strong suit.

I'm not sure you can fully draw the conclusions you are drawing here. For example, he has statistically had pretty awful secondary receiving options, so its quite possible that when he makes it to the read, the player isn't open, so he has to hold the ball longer and take a hit or sack.

Another big factor IMO is that he is 1st,1st,9th and 5th in drop backs without play action the last 4 years. Not having a respected run game really lets a team tee off on your QB. Minnesota rushes weren't pausing to make sure our backs had the ball and thus were able to come at him full speed and hit him full force on the credited hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can get down with all of this, this all sounds about right.

and I do hold Mayhew responsible for making that happen fwiw. If our current level of play continues all season, I will have serious issues with him. That doesn't mean automatic firing for me, as I generally believe that firing guys is not always the answer in the way that most fans seem to think it is, but it certainly makes it a viable option at the least. If we suck this year and I was the owner and didn't fire him, he would have a win a playoff game ultimatum for 2016.

The 2014 and 15 drafts simply have to work out better than it currently appears they will or Mayhew's resume takes a massive hit. I am not necessarily down on those classes, but they have flaws and they haven't proven enough yet to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Colts and Saints don't look good so far, I was way off on those two teams (thus far). Quite a few of their turnovers were fluky today and I doubt they will turn over the ball 5 times every game (for instance, the first INT was a tipped pass, the Gore and Luck fumble were both unforced and some of the others were weak also) but the Colts OL may very well be the worst in the league and it looks like not even Luck will be able to make something happen with that awful unit.

Very good (not great yet) QB, below average running game, below average offensive line, average at best defense. I just don't understand why there were so many SB projections with this team. Even if one is to believe that they are the 2nd best team in the AFC, New England is far and away better than them.

I posted a stat the other day that's very telling. They are 17-1 against the division the last 3+ seasons and now 16-16 against the rest of the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.......Colts OL may very well be the worst in the league and it looks like not even Luck will be able to make something happen with that awful unit.

This is a huge statement on this Lions forum. Are they more terrible than the Lions line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How to build a team is always the question. In the past I think it was a safer bet to try and build a team with solid line play than hope you could land an special talent at QB. Could be today's game has become so QB focused that that is no longer the case.

I was hoping to see where P. Manning was on those lists because I always had the impression watching him that Manning was a guy that didn't handle pressure particularly well.

TBH, I've never been huge fan of Stafford. I thought when he came on the scene that his one plus tool was a really quick release. I thought that gave him a chance to be a top tier guy, but the Lions are such a continual slow motion train wreck in so many areas that to this day I really don't have a strong sense of whether he is good enough to win with or not. But these are interesting breakdowns.

Manning ranked 17th last year, 2nd in 2013, 7th in 2012 with every year other than last year at over 60% accuracy%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that Stafford struggles under pressure, but I would also argue that all pressure is not created equally.

You can have a 'hurry' where a QB is pressured by the DE, and then steps up into a clean pocket and hits a wide open guy. Or you can have the Lions last game where you get pressured by both DEs, step up, and get off a last second pass while being executed by a DT.

To lump them all together into one stat seems questionable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate EchO arguing using data. None of us watches every NFL snap, so we tend to overestimate the skill of our good players, and maybe also overstate how bad our bad players are. Data can help give us perspective.

The big thing I take from EchO's posts is that Stafford has great skill but lacks poise in the pocket. This is something I've thought, but I think this data solidifies that judgement.

And just like you can't teach Stafford's arm strength, I don't think you can teach the poise a guy like Brady or Rodgers or Big Ben has. You just have to work around that limitation, and up to this point this season, the OL has not been able to do this for Stafford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure you can fully draw the conclusions you are drawing here. For example, he has statistically had pretty awful secondary receiving options, so its quite possible that when he makes it to the read, the player isn't open, so he has to hold the ball longer and take a hit or sack.

Another big factor IMO is that he is 1st,1st,9th and 5th in drop backs without play action the last 4 years. Not having a respected run game really lets a team tee off on your QB. Minnesota rushes weren't pausing to make sure our backs had the ball and thus were able to come at him full speed and hit him full force on the credited hits.

I think the second factor would play more of a factor than the first. The largest evidence to refute the claim that his secondary options being sub-par correlating to his accuracy% when under pressure/QBR is last season. I understand Calvin was injured/ineffective for 5 games, but that still leaves us with 11 games where he had a very solid #1 option (Calvin) and an excellent #2 option (Tate) and yet his accuracy% was the lowest since his rookie season. I would assume, that since last year was the first year in some time (aka since 2011) he had multiple very solid receivers, it would provide a bump in his numbers but conversely his numbers tanked.

I agree with your second point, and I don't think Stafford's inaccuracies when under pressure are solely his fault, but I was more looking to see how much of the blame he should shoulder. Now this is obviously just my opinion, but here is what percentage of the blame falls on the guilty parties and why.

Stafford: 55% - Even when the OL was stellar in 2013 (#3 best pass protection), he was still inaccurate; even when he had better receiving options in 2014 his numbers took a nose dive. These two facts make me think that he has an above average influence on how he does under pressure.

OL: 25% - I agree that not all hurries are created equal and Stafford was under a great deal of heavy pressure the first two weeks. That being said, I think Stafford's poor footwork and fundamentals (which have been a knock on him since college) put him in a position to get hit harder and more often.

Front office/coaching: 20% - I do agree that being able to run the ball, put the offense in the best position to succeed, and even acquiring better receiving options all play at least some factor. I don't think our coaches and front office have succeeded in doing so. Even last year when we went 11-5, I credit that largely for our #2 ranked defense putting us in a position to win the game and not our very inconsistent offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the second factor would play more of a factor than the first. The largest evidence to refute the claim that his secondary options being sub-par correlating to his accuracy% when under pressure/QBR is last season. I understand Calvin was injured/ineffective for 5 games, but that still leaves us with 11 games where he had a very solid #1 option (Calvin) and an excellent #2 option (Tate) and yet his accuracy% was the lowest since his rookie season. I would assume, that since last year was the first year in some time (aka since 2011) he had multiple very solid receivers, it would provide a bump in his numbers but conversely his numbers tanked.

I agree with your second point, and I don't think Stafford's inaccuracies when under pressure are solely his fault, but I was more looking to see how much of the blame he should shoulder. Now this is obviously just my opinion, but here is what percentage of the blame falls on the guilty parties and why.

Stafford: 55% - Even when the OL was stellar in 2013 (#3 best pass protection), he was still inaccurate; even when he had better receiving options in 2014 his numbers took a nose dive. These two facts make me think that he has an above average influence on how he does under pressure.

OL: 25% - I agree that not all hurries are created equal and Stafford was under a great deal of heavy pressure the first two weeks. That being said, I think Stafford's poor footwork and fundamentals (which have been a knock on him since college) put him in a position to get hit harder and more often.

Front office/coaching: 20% - I do agree that being able to run the ball, put the offense in the best position to succeed, and even acquiring better receiving options all play at least some factor. I don't think our coaches and front office have succeeded in doing so. Even last year when we went 11-5, I credit that largely for our #2 ranked defense putting us in a position to win the game and not our very inconsistent offense.

Stafford's accuracy is without a doubt his biggest weakness, so I'm not taking that away from you.

For the sake of breaking everything down, I will say that I don't think you're quite looking at it the best way. For example, if you are going to note that he had good WRs, you should probably look into how he does with those WRs. You say he got Tate last year, but took a nose dive. True, anecdotally, but Tate had the best season of his career with Stafford throwing to him and Stafford completed 72%(they don't do Acc% by WR unfortunately) to Tate. Similarly he completed 70% to Burleson the year before(our leader in receptions before the pizza injury). On the other hand, he completed 46% to guys like Durham,Fuller and Edwards over the last 2 years(13 and 14 that is). 50 and 52 to Ross and Ogletree in 2013. 54% to Ebron. He's always around the 57% range to Calvin. A more accurate QB would likely up that number, but you do have to factor in that Calvin is getting a lot of downfield passes and "throw it up there" type passes.

I would also argue he's had pretty bad luck with injuries to his weapons. He lost his 2nd,3rd and 4th WR, plus top RB early in 2012. He lost his #2 in 2013 and Calvin had both knee and finger injuries by the 2nd half of the season. Remember, he basically cost us 2 games that year with drops that appeared directly related to those fingers(Balt and TB). Last year he lost Calvin for 5 games, his top RB wasn't healthy for basically the entire year and all 3 of his TEs went through injuries. Post injury Calvin basically didn't have a good game against a good team. I have a hard time saying he was the # 1WR we know Calvin to be in the 11 games you referenced.

I don't think we are that far off what we think of him fwiw. I just figure if we are going to look at the data then it should all be out there. Fact is, he's usually throwing to a low caliber of WR(and when he does get a good #2, he gets them the ball efficiently) without the threat of a run game. I agree that he has always needed work on his footwork in order to help his accuracy. Particularly on deep passes and when under pressure. Going through his reads is not something I see him struggle with though and is something I would call closer to a strength for him. Could he improve how he throws to his lesser weapons? Probably. But even though Rodgers is the better QB by a good margin, you also don't see GB run a Kris Durham out there as his #3 and they went and got him a stud RB too. Tom Brady dropped under 60% comp when he didn't have Gronk a few years ago and losing Welker and Julius Thomas had a huge effect on Manning's stats, despite still having Sanders and Thomas as his 1 and 2. Drew Brees is all of a sudden the 34th ranked QB on PFF with Graham and Stills gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, I am using statistical evidence and you are using what exactly to back up your opinion? Green Bay has given up 2 sacks (same as Det) and 24 hurries (1 more than Detroit);

Without doing the research, off the top of my head I'd say that a lot of with what a hurry is.

For example, a relief pitch comes in 8th to get the final out, then faces the teeth of the opposing lineup in the 9th, trying to protect a 1 run lead. Or, a relief pitcher comes into face the final batter in the 9th with a three run lead... oh, and it's the number 8 batter from the other team. Look at the box score the next day and both of those pitcher get a save, right? But they are hardly equal.

Now, I fully agree that Stafford has his issues. He is at least partially to blame. But the OL especially in the Vikings game... I mean that wasn't even CLOSE to "just" a hurry. The line broke down before Stafford even finished standing up after getting the ball! Very often it wasn't a question of poor footwork or inaccuracy... it was more like: "Oh s***... find a white jersey and try to throw it!"

To be fair, there were times when the line gave him a few seconds and in some of those times he missed his throws... a foot behind, two feet too low... so again: Stafford does share some of the blame. I thing, generally speaking, that Stafford is a good QB. He's not elite, at least he hasn't shown that yet. But he's a good solid guy. A good solid line would make him look a lot better. I'm not sure even Aaron Rogers could look good behind out line... at least not in that Vikings game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...